PDA

View Full Version : GMC Monopolisum


(UGF} Corporal Desola
07-28-2008, 06:36 AM
I was looking through the screen shots of Men of War when I came to this one, http://www.1cpublishing.eu/screenshot/1500

It almost blew me from my chair, yes people, say now 'Oh, god, here it comes. What comes? Run!! Run!! Damn the Realisium is hitting like it does with FH2, oh, argggaggg, ahhhh!...', are those hard-top GMC CCKW-353s in North-Africa with British Troops on the back of them!

What the hell is Digital Mind Soft, Bestway or even your own historical departments/quality control telling you?
The British mainly used Chevrolets, Fords or Bedford trucks in North Africa, in all my years going through the IWM archives have I yet to find a picture of Brittish troops using British not American-owned GMC CCKW-353s or CCKW-352s for troop transport!

And the Dodge WC-53, what the hell, wheres the Chevrolet 30-cwt based vehicles such as the Model 1533X2s, WAs and WBs, C-60Ss and C-60Ls, Ford F8As and Bedford OYs.

Games are made for targeting audiences aren't they, which audience should a World War Two RTS target, the Sci-Fi FPS gamers?

Apart from that Vista sucks.

DMS|Instinct
07-28-2008, 12:04 PM
Our main target group are players who want to have fun playing games rather than discussing if all rivets are placed correctly on tanks.

You are right that it's historical inaccurate that British are using American trucks, but obviously it has zero impact on the gameplay, which is our priority in first place.
If we would work on 32x32 2d pixel graphics vehicles we would make you every truck you wish, however those vehicles here take not only days but weeks to be completed as they include lots of technology, which can't be seen on a screenshot.

So a simple question turns up, probably the most dominating in humankind: resource managing. Are we creating several trucks for several nations, which fought on the same front and were allies or do we concentrate on vehicles which have actually an impact on the game rather than eyecandy.

So 10 trucks or 10 tanks? What would you rather love to fight with?


On the other hand we are not aiming to have a 100% historical game, if gameplay is harmed, it will be done non-historical for that matter.

Well and actually the Bedford model was not ready at the time when those screenshots were made.


Other than that, I don't get your comment on FH2, so far I know the Battlefield engine is very limited in supporting realism, especially in the matter of physics. Atleast that is what their Modleader told me, with whom I have a chat once in a while.

(UGF} Corporal Desola
07-29-2008, 10:55 AM
I know what it takes just to model them, I've spent over 6 months before recreating a 3D model from the US Army Technical Manuals on the M3 Stuart (not M3A1 Stuart), I even know of how much formular can go into working out the very projection of the 3D scenes, and not to mention all the physics envolved in basic 3D collision detection (not mentioning the complexity of 'where-it-got-hit' destruction, featured in FoW), all you have to do is remind those scripters and engine moddifying programmers at DMS of how would they like to be writing an 3D engine from scratch using 8086 assembly language - Almost impossible - Almost.

So there is going to be Bedfords, yay, if anything the more interactive items you can put in a game the longer the game will take to complete or will introduce more options for the gamer to use which in the case of FoW would be GREAT.

I must say that it was a nice supprise to find out that the Rail Crane in Faces of War is usable, thats what Men of War will use right?

The old Faces of War content mixed in with the new stuff. And whoever wrote the GEM engine certinally were talented or were used to programming on MS-DOS and for the old slow processors, as it's memory usage and CPU usage is low compared to other games which use DirectX 9.0c and have LESS features, and the language it uses for scripting is about the easiest I've ever come across. Modding cannot be called modding with GEM, it's just too easy, what about it just gets called Content Processing (like Word Processing).

One more question, MoW will target Windows XP and Vista won't it?

EVERY IT professional should note, that DOS wasn't invented on a dead-line basis, actually the only way some of the great problems that have shaken the IT world been solved was not using a dead-line, look at Vista another victim of dead-lines.

DMS|Instinct
07-29-2008, 03:32 PM
Oh there are a lot of more things usable in MoW than just the crane :)


Yes, the game is optimized for XP and Vista.


Thanks for your nice comment on the GEM engine, it's indeed a pleasure to work with it!

(UGF} Corporal Desola
07-30-2008, 05:17 AM
Yay! Up Vista! Windows 7 is comming out someday in the future hopefully that will contain DirectX 8.1, DirectX Compatibility v8.1 and DirectX 9.0c along with DirectX 10, so it reaches a proper multimedia application compatibility level instead of that All the Way with Dx 10.

Anyways, I forgot to mention texturing, now thats an art, I believe to hand draw textures you need to have been born with MSPAINT in your hand as the Paint Shop or Photo Shop feature sets do help, but you have to have that Computer Artisistic ability as painting on canvas is completly different because you can FEEL the brush/pencile there. Thats another thing that can slow the process of model production.

BTW, the GEM Editior certinally does the GEM scripting language justice, as it's just as easy to use, maybe GEM could be used to build an FPS?

And I never got a complete answer to, does MoW use some stuff from FoW?
Can you post a pic of the Bedford and will it be the OY or QLD?
Also, is there a list of the vehicles that are in MoW?

hmm, in about 60 years time, it will be good to see weather FoW and MoW has been converted to the current machine-codes and executable formats, and thus has survived the test of time.

DMS|Instinct
07-30-2008, 09:28 AM
I will see about the Bedford, maybe in a while. It should be also in the MP Beta so far as I remember.

Yes, there is stuff being used from Men of War.

(UGF} Corporal Desola
07-31-2008, 04:42 AM
Yay!

Anyways, in description of MoW will they mention it being a sequel to Faces of War?

And what about that list of vehicles that are in the game, any chance of seeing that in 1C Company's 'Features' section or something like that?

Nike-it
07-31-2008, 06:19 AM
Yay!

Anyways, in description of MoW will they mention it being a sequel to Faces of War?

And what about that list of vehicles that are in the game, any chance of seeing that in 1C Company's 'Features' section or something like that?

The list of vehicles and their description is planned. It will be available on the official web-site which will be launched soon.

(UGF} Corporal Desola
07-31-2008, 06:25 AM
Yay!

szebus
08-07-2008, 10:22 AM
Is it possible that in the future 1C could come out with a game like SHOWW2, FoW or MoW only not playinganymore in WW2 ? I don't mind playing WW2, is is just to see the same game with modern world scenarios. Like a fictional modern war conflict or later even something more Scifi like an Ufo invation or something... Oh and I loved the whole Ufo series, ever wondering how should be one episode of the series made with FoW's engine, or even combining the two games in the meaning of ww2 FoW's engine but Ufo series style :D and by that i mean only the geoscape and base construction posibility the rest of it (the missions) to be randomised and be played as FoW :D or something like that.

Let's say you do the Ufo MoW combination, then i gues you could put Helicopters in the game and if you can do this in the future it should sound like UFO:MassWars or something like this, becouse the player have the access to the geoscape , to build bases on it and to recruit troops and armors plus helicopters and go to missios against the aliens with a full arsenal, he can destroi cities and thus he will recieve less money and so on... there are lot's of ideas and hopefuly the game should be a modern recreation of UFO , a far more advanced conception of the games like UFO and MoW.

This is just a tought and a dream for me even if I wish this to become a eality :D so go on and maybe you will make my game dream a reality ;)

DMS|Instinct
08-07-2008, 02:33 PM
It depends on the success of MoW and how the market evolves, it's too early to talk about that yet.

szebus
08-14-2008, 01:24 PM
who owns the license for the game engine ?

Nike-it
08-14-2008, 01:35 PM
who owns the license for the game engine ?

It belongs to Best Way.

(UGF} Corporal Desola
08-16-2008, 12:51 PM
Yeah thats right Best Way own the engine license and DMS were called in to create the content because someone relized programmers usually can't draw - to much RSI from too much C++, I always said C++ would bring about the end of the world in it's own way, hehehe, thats why I stick to the ASM, BASIC and PASCAL (AB but not C, but P hehehee).

szebus
09-01-2008, 07:54 PM
Is it possible to use MoW engine to build a first person shooter like Battlefield only with the games destructible terrain ? HAve you ever considered using the engine to build a "Warrock" like game ? This would be awesome to have a game like "Warrock" with destructible enviroment and the wehicles in the game to have almost the same damage mode like in MOW and to see some helicopters in it and airplanes witch the player controls in this fully destructible free to download free to play (buy the extras) FPS enviroment ... Oh but it is just a tought .

synjones
09-26-2008, 05:46 PM
This would be great to have a game like this with destructible environment and the vehicles in the game to have almost the same damage mode like in MOW and to see some helicopters.I feel that there are lot's of ideas and hopeful the game should be a modern recreation.
================================================
Synjones
Used Cars (http://used.gov-auctions.org)